http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2007/05/02/380-ppm-20000-ppm-or-none-of-the-above/ Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:48:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2007/05/02/380-ppm-20000-ppm-or-none-of-the-above/#comment-301571 Martin Pearson Mon, 28 May 2007 10:20:14 +0000 http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2007/05/02/380-ppm-20000-ppm-or-none-of-the-above/#comment-301571 Alexander Cockburn's suggestion that a 30% drop in man-made CO2 emissions should have caused a drop in the atmospheric CO2 concentration is utterly bizarre. Even with a 30% drop, you are still adding CO2 to the atmosphere at 70% of the former rate, so it is common sense that the atmospheric concentration will continue to rise. His argument is like saying that if you are filling a swimming pool by pumping in water, then if you reduce the pumping rate the water level in the pool should go down; of course it won't - the level will continue going up, just a bit more slowly than before! Cockburn's argument suggests a complete lack of understanding of even the most basic of scientific principles. Alexander Cockburn’s suggestion that a 30% drop in man-made CO2 emissions should have caused a drop in the atmospheric CO2 concentration is utterly bizarre. Even with a 30% drop, you are still adding CO2 to the atmosphere at 70% of the former rate, so it is common sense that the atmospheric concentration will continue to rise. His argument is like saying that if you are filling a swimming pool by pumping in water, then if you reduce the pumping rate the water level in the pool should go down; of course it won’t - the level will continue going up, just a bit more slowly than before! Cockburn’s argument suggests a complete lack of understanding of even the most basic of scientific principles.

]]>